PDA

View Full Version : Put the slicks on



55 Tony
03-17-2018, 06:34 PM
I did 3 runs at a crappy track but was hooking up better each time. This is my last run, I don't know what any of this means:

60' 2.492 @ 48.99mph
330 5.488 @ 73.39mph
1/8 8.524 @ 82.32mph

This is with 3.42 gears.

Now here is the kicker! The guys there told me that on the last run I got the tires off the ground 1.5 to 1.75"!!!! I never expected that!!

I had to stop because my heater core sprung a leak and was running out on the track. I wasn't actually racing anyone, just seeing what it can do. A very small crowd.
I think I need to get some taller gears, and well since it's almost summer, bypass the heater core.
I was testing the slicks at home in the drive and have 17psi driver, 16 passenger.
I still can't believe I got air.

chevynut
03-17-2018, 07:30 PM
Don't know how accurate this is.....

http://www.wallaceracing.com/et-hp-mph-8th.php

"Your Flywheel HP is 287 computed from your vehicle weight of 3600 pounds and ET of 8.52 seconds."

chasracer
03-17-2018, 08:00 PM
I guess you're kidding about not knowing what any of it means but for right now, working on the 60 foot would be good if you want the car to get quicker. Remove whatever weight that you can, possibly move up the timing a bit and see how it improves. I am a little worried about the different pressures in the slicks - that's something that we tend to stay away from. It might work okay at this slower speed but as things get quicker having one tire pressure higher than the other will tend to "drive" the car to the lower pressure side. Also if you look at your 330 to 660 speed, that was half the distance of the run, yet it only picked up 9 miles per hour in that distance. Horsepower is being limited by something. Have fun!

Bitchin'57
03-17-2018, 08:08 PM
I can't believe you left hard enough to pull the wheels off the ground, yet ran a 2.492 60'. Got any video?

55 Tony
03-18-2018, 05:06 AM
OK, accuracy is out the window here. The track still doesn't have any electronics, I was using a cell phone app that goes by GPS. I know times would be a lot different with different gears, a lot different I hope. 3.42's aren't made for racing and a calculator without factoring in gears, I think is useless. No, no video. I'm just going by what they told me. As far as the different air pressures, I had the air low and did a little burn out in my driveway. It was all on the sides nothing in the middle so I kept adding air. The one side got a good patch and the other side caught up with another pound. I don't want to lower the one so I guess I'll raise the other. Maybe I could use more air in both? In the driveway I can hang out the door, give it a little throttle and see them wrinkle. That's just going a little more than off idle. For the first time it seems like I can actually feel the caltracs working.

55 Tony
03-18-2018, 05:12 AM
I guess you're kidding about not knowing what any of it means but for right now, working on the 60 foot would be good if you want the car to get quicker. Remove whatever weight that you can, possibly move up the timing a bit and see how it improves. I am a little worried about the different pressures in the slicks - that's something that we tend to stay away from. It might work okay at this slower speed but as things get quicker having one tire pressure higher than the other will tend to "drive" the car to the lower pressure side. Also if you look at your 330 to 660 speed, that was half the distance of the run, yet it only picked up 9 miles per hour in that distance. Horsepower is being limited by something. Have fun!
No, I'm not kidding about not knowing what the numbers mean. I've been to drags maybe two times in my life and never was around a car or driver. A complete newbie. Well except for my first visit to this track back a couple months with street tires, that was about useless.

chevynut
03-18-2018, 08:12 AM
a calculator without factoring in gears, I think is useless.

You don't need to know the gears or anything else about the car to calculate horsepower. All you need is weight, distance and time to get the average horsepower produced. One horsepower is 550 ft-lb/second. I would think a GPS phone app would be pretty accurate over 1/8 mile, maybe not as good over 60 feet. Doesn't your app give you horsepower?

55 Tony
03-18-2018, 11:46 AM
You don't need to know the gears or anything else about the car to calculate horsepower. All you need is weight, distance and time to get the average horsepower produced. One horsepower is 550 ft-lb/second. I would think a GPS phone app would be pretty accurate over 1/8 mile, maybe not as good over 60 feet. Doesn't your app give you horsepower?

That doesn't make sense. Why do people racing have tall gears and for economy short gears? Maybe that calculating works for HP at the wheels, not the motor? Or HP USED, not available. I see the calculators everywhere, but it just doesn't make sense. And not that it's a giant number, but a TH400 takes what 25 HP just to run? Also on a dyno they go up to red line where normally is your peak power. Hell I was paying attention to the car and the track and honestly didn't feel it shift, but I'm right at the point where I'm just hitting 3rd close to the finish line. Taller gears are needed. I don't know what to say about the calculators? HP being used makes the most sense to me.

Rick_L
03-18-2018, 12:26 PM
"Taller" gears means less rpm at a given speed, not more. You want "shorter" gears, which are higher numerical.

For formulas like this, it's not horsepower at the flywheel, or "horsepower used" , it's horsepower applied. Because that's what's known. Any implication of horsepower at the flywheel is an assumption of the drivetrain efficiency, including tire spin, converter slippage, power loss in the transmission and rear axle, etc.

55 Rescue Dog
03-18-2018, 01:12 PM
Gearing is more about torque multiplication, not horsepower anyway. If you pick a dedicated drag gear like a 4:11, unless you trailer it, it won't be much fun to drive to the track or anywhere else without buzzing that BBC at 4000RPM plus just going down the highway. Tire diameter is one factor, and determine what speed, and redline engine speed will be when you trip the lights. You wouldn't want to hit redline in high gear before you even get there. A G-force meter app, or similar can calculate horsepower, 0-60, 1/4 mile times, etc. You are also pushing a big shoebox into the wind. I would look at torque converters, not knowing what you have now, or how much traction you have,.

55 Tony
03-18-2018, 02:49 PM
"Taller" gears means less rpm at a given speed, not more. You want "shorter" gears, which are higher numerical.

For formulas like this, it's not horsepower at the flywheel, or "horsepower used" , it's horsepower applied. Because that's what's known. Any implication of horsepower at the flywheel is an assumption of the drivetrain efficiency, including tire spin, converter slippage, power loss in the transmission and rear axle, etc.

Just when I thought I had the "tall" and "short" gear lingo I used it backwards.

OK, so are you saying the HP calculators that use weight, distance and time are bull?

55 Tony
03-18-2018, 03:01 PM
Gearing is more about torque multiplication, not horsepower anyway. If you pick a dedicated drag gear like a 4:11, unless you trailer it, it won't be much fun to drive to the track or anywhere else without buzzing that BBC at 4000RPM plus just going down the highway. Tire diameter is one factor, and determine what speed, and redline engine speed will be when you trip the lights. You wouldn't want to hit redline in high gear before you even get there. A G-force meter app, or similar can calculate horsepower, 0-60, 1/4 mile times, etc. You are also pushing a big shoebox into the wind. I would look at torque converters, not knowing what you have now, or how much traction you have,.

Driving to the track will be no problem, it's just over 1 mile away. I drove it there and home with the slicks. Now with rpm calculators they are a lot better except allowing for converter slippage and I get this:
Now with 3.42 28" tire 70mph I'm at 2873rpm
switch to 4.11 gears and I'm up to 3452rpm
get the 4L80E I've been planning on and I'm lower than now at 2589rpm. Right?

55 Tony
03-18-2018, 03:10 PM
Tire diameter is one factor, and determine what speed, and redline engine speed will be when you trip the lights. You wouldn't want to hit redline in high gear before you even get there. A G-force meter app, or similar can calculate horsepower, 0-60, 1/4 mile times, etc. You are also pushing a big shoebox into the wind. I would look at torque converters, not knowing what you have now, or how much traction you have,.

No redline problem that I see with 4.11's and a 5500 redline I'll be good for 105mph or so. I don't think I'll be doing that in an 1/8.

Bitchin'57
03-18-2018, 04:10 PM
Just when I thought I had the "tall" and "short" gear lingo I used it backwards.

OK, so are you saying the HP calculators that use weight, distance and time are bull?
Rick is correct. Those calculators give the horsepower applied to the rear wheels.

Bitchin'57
03-18-2018, 04:17 PM
Don't know how accurate this is.....

http://www.wallaceracing.com/et-hp-mph-8th.php

"Your Flywheel HP is 287 computed from your vehicle weight of 3600 pounds and ET of 8.52 seconds."

Wow, I can't believe it gives flywheel horsepower. It has to assume a lot of variables. I wonder if that's a mistake and it really should be HP at the drive wheels.

markm
03-18-2018, 04:39 PM
My old 70 SS Chevelle with a 76 peanut port truck motor with a .500 lift marine cam used to do 1.98 60ft and 14.0 1/4s with 3.31 gears and 255/60/15 Goodyear radials. I forgot stock fuel pump and Holley 650 spread bore. 8.50 in the 1/8 is pretty good for a turtles 60 ft. If I recall Tony is opposed to buying a real torque converter which would fix the 60 ft issue.

Rick_L
03-18-2018, 04:52 PM
OK, so are you saying the HP calculators that use weight, distance and time are bull?

Not at all. Just that they are calculating AVERAGE, not peak, power at the wheels. Any extension to flywheel hp has to assume some kind of loss through the drivetrain. And remember it's average over the entire run.

The 4.11 gears you are considering will raise the engine rpm over the 1/8 mile. This will in turn mean more average horsepower because of the higher rpm.

I would not get too concerned with these numbers until you take it to a real track with real timing equipment and verify that the numbers you're now getting are even in the ballpark, because they may not be. markm's comment about a peanut port BBC going 1.98 in 60' with similar gears to yours is spot on. Your setup is either a dog or your timing numbers are suspect.

55 Tony
03-18-2018, 05:06 PM
My old 70 SS Chevelle with a 76 peanut port truck motor with a .500 lift marine cam used to do 1.98 60ft and 14.0 1/4s with 3.31 gears and 255/60/15 Goodyear radials. I forgot stock fuel pump and Holley 650 spread bore. 8.50 in the 1/8 is pretty good for a turtles 60 ft. If I recall Tony is opposed to buying a real torque converter which would fix the 60 ft issue.

Oh markm you. Stop buttering me up. I'm not that kind of guy.

chevynut
03-18-2018, 05:08 PM
Wow, I can't believe it gives flywheel horsepower. It has to assume a lot of variables. I wonder if that's a mistake and it really should be HP at the drive wheels.

They make an assumption of drivetrain losses to come up with flywheel horsepower. I think they typically use around 15%.

chevynut
03-18-2018, 05:20 PM
OK, so are you saying the HP calculators that use weight, distance and time are bull?

It's just physics and math.

If you put 3000 pounds of force on an object and push it 1000 feet, you've done 3,000,000 foot pounds of work. That's how much energy you used to push it that far, no matter how fast you do it. The time element is where horsepower comes from. If you do that amount of work in 10 seconds, you've done 300,000 ft-lb/second of work. If you divide that by 550 ft-lb/second = 1 HP you get 545.45 HP. So it takes that much horsepower to do that much work in 10 seconds. Less time takes more HP, or conversely more HP can do the same amount of work in less time.

Horsepower isn't measured directly. It's a calculation, even when using a dyno. What they're doing is measuring torque at various RPM intervals, and calculating HP at those same intervals. HP = torque x RPM. At 5252 RPM horsepower and torque are equal, i.e. 400 ft-lb of torque ALWAYS gives you 400 HP at 5252 RPM.

55 Tony
03-18-2018, 05:44 PM
I just did a little test with the phone app. Set it to go and it starts when it senses movement. I walked fast for 2 seconds and hit stop. It showed 2.97 seconds. There is a setting for the timing to count ahead for any lag in the movement it senses that was set on. I set it for neutral and 2 seconds is read out as less than 1 second. Evidently this isn't very accurate. Also there if a choice of different gps accuracies. When I set it to high, it takes 4 minutes to zero in on a fixed position. They aren't going to stage me and wait 4 minutes for my phone. I hope this track gets some real timing equipment. It's a shame, it was all there and after no one buying or renting the track and running it for 2 or 3 years, they sold that stuff.

As for going to another track, I doubt it will happen. It doesn't excite me enough to drive 2 or 3 hours each way. This is/was just a little fun for me practically in my back yard. I'll just race some other cars and forget the time and have some fun. I'll hold off on the gear change for a while and decide later. Who knows, this track could close next week.

55 Tony
03-18-2018, 05:49 PM
It's just physics and math.

If you put 3000 pounds of force on an object and push it 1000 feet, you've done 3,000,000 foot pounds of work. That's how much energy you used to push it that far, no matter how fast you do it. The time element is where horsepower comes from. If you do that amount of work in 10 seconds, you've done 300,000 ft-lb/second of work. If you divide that by 550 ft-lb/second = 1 HP you get 545.45 HP. So it takes that much horsepower to do that much work in 10 seconds. Less time takes more HP, or conversely more HP can do the same amount of work in less time.

Horsepower isn't measured directly. It's a calculation, even when using a dyno. What they're doing is measuring torque at various RPM intervals, and calculating HP at those same intervals. HP = torque x RPM. At 5252 RPM horsepower and torque are equal, i.e. 400 ft-lb of torque ALWAYS gives you 400 HP at 5252 RPM.

So are you saying that changing my gears won't effect my time? Or are you saying that changing my gears to 4.11's will decrease my time and increase my HP ... according to the calculator?

chevynut
03-18-2018, 06:21 PM
So are you saying that changing my gears won't effect my time? Or are you saying that changing my gears to 4.11's will decrease my time and increase my HP ... according to the calculator?

I didn't say that changing gears won't affect your time. If you lower your gear ratio, your engine will be operating at higher RPM which means it will probably put out more average horsepower, lowering your times. The calculator really has nothing to do with it. It just calculates your AVERAGE horsepower over the distance that you run when you input your car's weight, the time, and distance. If your time decreases over the same distance, you are generating more average horsepower.

55 Tony
03-18-2018, 06:51 PM
I didn't say that changing gears won't affect your time. If you lower your gear ratio, your engine will be operating at higher RPM which means it will probably put out more average horsepower, lowering your times. The calculator really has nothing to do with it. It just calculates your AVERAGE horsepower over the distance that you run when you input your car's weight, the time, and distance. If your time decreases over the same distance, you are generating more average horsepower.

So you are saying that I could have well over 400HP but my set up is not set up to use it?

chevynut
03-18-2018, 08:18 PM
So you are saying that I could have well over 400HP but my set up is not set up to use it?

You're talking PEAK horsepower and the calculator gives you average horsepower. Your engine RPM is changing throughout the run, so your torque changes with it. Your app is using the accelerometer in your phone, I believe. Do you know if it's sensitive to orientation? Does it tell you maximum acceleration during the run?

55 Tony
03-19-2018, 03:55 AM
You're talking PEAK horsepower and the calculator gives you average horsepower. Your engine RPM is changing throughout the run, so your torque changes with it. Your app is using the accelerometer in your phone, I believe. Do you know if it's sensitive to orientation? Does it tell you maximum acceleration during the run?

I don't know if my phone has an accelerometer. And I know the app only mentions GPS. No mention of maximum acceleration. Maybe I'll look for a different app.

55 Tony
03-19-2018, 04:56 AM
So if my phone has almost a 1 second too much advance built in, if you took my times and subtracted 1 second off them does that sound more like a good running BBC? One that is capable of lifting the wheels off the ground? I'm not saying that is my time, it's too much of a guess, I'm just curious if it may be in the ball park.

chevynut
03-19-2018, 05:14 AM
I don't know if my phone has an accelerometer. And I know the app only mentions GPS. No mention of maximum acceleration. Maybe I'll look for a different app.

Of course it does. You said: "Set it to go and it starts when it senses movement.". A GPS signal is only good to a few feet and actual location moves around a little. For it to sense small movement, it must have an accelerometer built in.

What phone and app are you using?

55 Tony
03-19-2018, 05:19 AM
My phone does tell me maximum speed, but I didn't let off right at the line. Next time I'll try to focus and let off right at the finish line, or just a hair before it and see what the calculator says using my weight and maximum speed. This could be interesting from what I see.

55 Tony
03-19-2018, 05:25 AM
My phone is a ZTE something. $45 @ Walmart. Works well as a phone, text, email, and even the internet. Not so sure about other stuff.

55 Tony
03-19-2018, 05:31 AM
The app is "car performance" and I don't think it has an accelerometer, not one that's built into the app anyway. That's why it has the lag time correction built into the app, which when I tested it added almost 1 second to my test.

chevynut
03-19-2018, 05:48 AM
So if my phone has almost a 1 second too much advance built in, if you took my times and subtracted 1 second off them does that sound more like a good running BBC? One that is capable of lifting the wheels off the ground? I'm not saying that is my time, it's too much of a guess, I'm just curious if it may be in the ball park.

I don't know why any "advance" would be built into a timer. I can see having an adjustment for sensitivity of the accelerometer. It could be set off just by vibrations if it's too sensitive. What you want to do is have the timer start as soon as the phone senses forward acceleration of some magnitude. It should be able to sense that in milliseconds. Trying to subtract any time would be complete guesswork and imo would be meaningless. If you're curious, use the calculator. But you also really need to know the weight of the car with you in it.

55 Tony
03-19-2018, 05:59 AM
The advance is built in because the GPS sensing movement has a lag time.

chevynut
03-19-2018, 06:37 AM
The app is "car performance" and I don't think it has an accelerometer, not one that's built into the app anyway. That's why it has the lag time correction built into the app, which when I tested it added almost 1 second to my test.

The accelerometer would be built into the phone, not the app. I personally don't think that using the GPS would be very accurate since most GPS devices are typically only good to 15 feet and don't update that fast. They're getting better but there's only so much that can be done since the system depends on measurements from satellites. An accelerometer-based app should work better.

"Car Performance uses the GPS chip (Not the accelerometer) in your phone along with complex algorithms to accurately and easily determine the performance figures for your car. This requires no calibration, no adjustments and is not affected by the elevation or the movement of the phone. All you need to do is get a signal > press start > go! That simple!"

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.unnull.apps.carperformance&hl=en

55 Tony
03-19-2018, 06:50 AM
The accelerometer would be built into the phone, not the app. I personally don't think that using the GPS would be very accurate since most GPS devices are typically only good to 15 feet and don't update that fast. They're getting better but there's only so much that can be done since the system depends on measurements from satellites. An accelerometer-based app should work better.


Well as hard as this is to believe, I agree with you.

I did find an accelerometer on the phone but it only shows something that looks like a seismograph readout. It's very sensitive, holding the phone with two hand it still shows a ripple. Set it on the desk and it then showed a flat line.

markm
03-19-2018, 08:13 AM
Rick stated in #17 above Tony needs to go to a real drag strip and leave playing phone games to the Millennial's. Any real drag racer will tell you .2 or .3 tenths change in 60 foot time is huge.

chevynut
03-19-2018, 09:04 AM
There's no reason a good phone app won't work and be pretty accurate. Even with GPS for location and a 15 foot error, that's only about a 2% error in 1/8 mile if the clock starts at the right time. That's where the accelerometer plays into it. A 15 foot error on starting is 25% of the 60-foot mark. But anyone who still uses a rotary phone and has never messed with a modern smartphone wouldn't understand that. :D

55 Tony
03-19-2018, 11:34 AM
Rick stated in #17 above Tony needs to go to a real drag strip and leave playing phone games to the Millennial's. Any real drag racer will tell you .2 or .3 tenths change in 60 foot time is huge.

I find it odd that you feel comfortable telling others how they should live their lives. I have no intention of being a "real drag racer". I'm just having a little fun with my car.

markm
03-19-2018, 12:24 PM
There's no reason a good phone app won't work and be pretty accurate. Even with GPS for location and a 15 foot error, that's only about a 2% error in 1/8 mile if the clock starts at the right time. That's where the accelerometer plays into it. A 15 foot error on starting is 25% of the 60-foot mark. But anyone who still uses a rotary phone and has never messed with a modern smartphone wouldn't understand that. :D

Really Cnut if you only knew how stupid this sounds to a drag racer, a tenth of a second difference in reaction time equates to about a car length on big end. I have won or lost many a race in my day with a MOV of .001 or .0002.

55 Rescue Dog
03-19-2018, 02:09 PM
Most of the time, the good ole Butt Dyno is great tool.

chasracer
03-19-2018, 02:24 PM
Really Cnut if you only knew how stupid this sounds to a drag racer, a tenth of a second difference in reaction time equates to about a car length on big end. I have won or lost many a race in my day with a MOV of .001 or .0002.

Hey markm - you and I live this stuff every weekend. As a note, we raced the new concrete surface at Virginia Motorsports Park this past Friday, the track is green with very little rubber and it will take about a month of races for it to come around. But anyway, right-side groove in the right lane tossed even big-tired dragsters all day long. We were supposed to race Saturday/Sunday but we decided that working on our other racecar was more enjoyable than dealing with traction issues.

Anyway - my point is there is room for everybody and as long as they are squaring off and going at it, even if it's just for bragging rights - I am all for it. Drag Racing is a great sport and bracket racing is a pretty good playing field leveler. It's not perfect but few things ever are. I am glad 55 Tony is having some fun with his car - that's what its all about.

chevynut
03-19-2018, 03:45 PM
I find it odd that you feel comfortable telling others how they should live their lives.

That's just the way markm (aka USA1) is. He wouldn't know technology, physics, or math if it slapped him in the face. He stopped learning about new stuff 40+ years ago because he thought he knew all he ever needed to know. :D


I have no intention of being a "real drag racer". I'm just having a little fun with my car.

That was pretty obvious to me, but markm (aka USA1) thinks you need "real" timers on a "real" track to even think about measuring how your car is doing. Funny though that he doesn't believe in dynos, computers, EFI, ABS, or power anything. It's just "too complicated" for him. :D From everything I've read on the internet, some of these new smartphone apps are pretty accurate and today's phones have some amazing sensors. I've never used one myself and I tend to think drag races....anything but the top classes...are boring. Maybe it's more fun when you're a contestant, but watching isn't very appealing to me, especially brackets.

chasracer
03-19-2018, 04:26 PM
Maybe it's more fun when you're a contestant, but watching isn't very appealing to me, especially brackets.

No and it's not really intended to be appealing to spectators. It is a participant sport, one that measures everything you do both correctly and wrong. The ability to predict on a round to round basis of what your car is going to do along with what you are going to do driving the car is pretty close to an art form. I gave up a long time ago trying to explain brackets or class racing to anyone that has no interest in learning it. There's just too many equations that play into it. But, I am the same way about roundy-round stuff. I watch the green flag then come back in a few hours and catch the last 5 laps, the rest of it is just filler. And I actually did that type of racing at one time but its too dull for my tastes.

Rick_L
03-19-2018, 07:08 PM
Well there's some big contradictions here. Jumping into a discussion about the technical aspects and discussing the limitations of GPS acceleration data. Then saying that drag racing is boring unless you are into the technical stuff when that was the subject?

I've been a serious drag racer and I understand that it's not a good spectator sport unless you get into the tech stuff. If you're in it for the thrill of watching you have to watch the fastest classes and ignore anything else if you're only in it for total bling. Even those classes have a technical aspect if you care to know.

Seems like we've discovered here that I-phone tech is limited here and if you want better you may have to go to a track with real timing. And that's bad? C'mon.

chasracer
03-20-2018, 05:20 AM
You're right - we did get off on a tangent there.

I understand that 55 Tony was just getting an idea of what his car would do and there's nothing wrong with that no matter how you do it. Heck, we used to start counting to ourselves when we raced from street light to street light, not much different. And as anyone knows if they have ever traveled to race, drag strips within miles of each other will provide slightly different numbers. 60 foot at one might be 60 feet while another one, it might be 59 15/16 feet - just depends on how the timing system was installed. Then throw in track prep or lack of, flatness of the raceway....the variables just keep coming. All in fun!

55 Tony
03-20-2018, 05:48 AM
. I am glad 55 Tony is having some fun with his car - that's what its all about.

Thanks chas! Like I had said, I know basically nothing about drag racing, if I did I never would have posted those times! Anyway, I'm glad I found that problem with the Iphone app. Last night I bypassed the leaking heater core and redid my fuel line to make it shorter, got rid of the plastic filter, and got rid of the 90° fitting. Hope it doesn't rain this weekend. :)

55 Tony
03-20-2018, 05:56 AM
You're right - we did get off on a tangent there.

I understand that 55 Tony was just getting an idea of what his car would do and there's nothing wrong with that no matter how you do it. Heck, we used to start counting to ourselves when we raced from street light to street light, not much different. And as anyone knows if they have ever traveled to race, drag strips within miles of each other will provide slightly different numbers. 60 foot at one might be 60 feet while another one, it might be 59 15/16 feet - just depends on how the timing system was installed. Then throw in track prep or lack of, flatness of the raceway....the variables just keep coming. All in fun!

Thanks again. Speaking of prep, I don't think they had any "rosin" or whatever it's called. That last run they were warming the staging area with a large propane torch just before I got staged. Sounds like cheating! All I know is that there was hardly any screeching from the tires.

markm
03-20-2018, 10:50 AM
Seem to me that discussions like this help show true colors, 40 years ago at Lawrence Dragstrip we did not get 60 ft times or reaction and all classes ran a very quick pro tree. Some are pontificating about things they have no clue. Today I know 90 plus percent are won at the start. We have not even mentioned RT.

chasracer
03-20-2018, 11:37 AM
Markm, yep I was there too. Attended my first drag race at 14 with a couple of guys down the street that raced their souped up '54 Chevy. Two years later got my driving permit and a month after that I was at the strip with my mom's Chevy. Timing card back then had your car#, ET, MPH and win/lost marked on it. If I remember right, the tree was just an instant green like a traffic signal. I was runner-up in my first race and because they published the top two finishers in each class in the Monday morning paper, I was scared to death my parents would see it~!

markm
03-20-2018, 12:10 PM
Markm, yep I was there too. Attended my first drag race at 14 with a couple of guys down the street that raced their souped up '54 Chevy. Two years later got my driving permit and a month after that I was at the strip with my mom's Chevy. Timing card back then had your car#, ET, MPH and win/lost marked on it. If I remember right, the tree was just an instant green like a traffic signal. I was runner-up in my first race and because they published the top two finishers in each class in the Monday morning paper, I was scared to death my parents would see it~!


I understand my Camaro was broke and I won my first trophy with my Dads 72 Cheyenne Super, still have that truck and it pulls a Camaro to the strip on occasion. Our ET cards were the size of a business card less mph. Back then we dialed in 8.0, 8.05, 8.10, etc today its 8.01, 8.02, 8.03.
We also raced with windows down, no helmets and seatbelts and did not know what tech or SFI were.

markm
03-21-2018, 06:45 PM
To me the sad part of this thread is how few racers chimed in.